Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by term2 7 years ago
    the "greater good" really means for the good of the people defining "greater good"
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Dobrien 7 years ago
      Sheldon Richman is editor of The Freeman he says "So why is the principle that the end doesn’t justify the means absent from most discussion of government policy? Why are political measures routinely defended on the sole basis that they will bring about some good consequence that supposedly outweighs the costs (from the perspective of those who propose them)? This happens all the time. A tariff is justified by the help it is thought to give to a struggling domestic industry. A price control is justified as a way to keep the price of some product affordable. A mandate that employers or insurance companies (nominally) pay for women’s contraception is justified in terms of women’s health or of reducing the number of abortions. Torture is justified as a source of useful information. Obliteration bombing is justified as a way to shorten a war.

      In all these cases and more, those who proffer the government policy seem to think that all they need do is identify a consequence as the “greater good” and the discussion is over. The end justifies the means. That may indicate one of two things. The proponent of the measure may think that the objective of the policy is more important than whatever those who are forced to pay for it must forgo as a result. Or the proponent may be oblivious of the costs entirely, as though there were none.

      Costs and Victims

      But, first of all, there are always costs to—and therefore victims of—any government action. Government is force, and “[c]oercive intervention . . . signifies per se that the individual or individuals coerced would not have done what they are now doing were it not for the intervention” (Murray Rothbard, Power and Market). A tariff forces consumers to pay more for products, leaving them less money to spend on other people’s products. That’s two sets of victims. A price control will drive marginal producers out of business, creating shortages. A contraception mandate will cost someone money, no matter how often the products and services are called “free.” Etc.

      All those who are forced to bear the costs are treated by the government and the special-interest groups it empowers as mere means to other people’s ends; that is, they are treated as less than human."

      I will add, that is evil.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by term2 7 years ago
        One thing I DONT like about Trump's plans is the "border tax" idea. As an importer, we pay that tax and pass it on to our customers, who eventually pay it. I am not sure WHO really benefits from that except the government. I am NOT going to hire american workers as a result. I would automate to eliminate workers, or hire illegals who actually WANT jobs as opposed to americans who feel they are entitled to a job.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by 7 years ago
    So there is one answer of 100% and another near zero percent. It seems that there is a unbelievable difference in philosophy and understanding of reality.
    No wonder war and the evil that men do are unending.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Dobrien 7 years ago
      The “Greater Good”

      If “goods” are incommensurable, then one of them cannot be said to be “greater” than others. Thus acting for the “greater good” is without meaning. “[T]his lack of commensurability eliminates all possibility of reference for the expression ‘greater good’ as the consequentialist uses this expression,” natural-law philosopher Germain Grisez writes.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by bassboat 7 years ago
    The "Greater Good" is a red flag meaning "How the government can slip its slimy fingers into your billfold and remove money". These politicians do not care about people at the core but only care if they will be re-elected. As long as they are seen as "doing something" they are given a pass on the results of their actions. Unfortunately we have a population that is just plain stupid. I am truly sorry to have to be so blunt but the time has come for someone to call a spade a spade. Until schools are held accountable for what they teach and parents are held accountable for their children and the person him/herself is held accountable we are destined to a dictatorship running the country. Freedom as we have known in the past will be a distant memory and a predetermined outcome of mediocrity will be the result. Even that might not be possible with an economy being run by politicians with more and more "programs" to assure "that that will NEVER happen again".
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Abaco 7 years ago
    As I've gotten older in life I've seen some real evil done in the name of the greater good. I have dedicated the last decade of my life to studying one of the most well-known programs based on this concept. What I have come to realize is this. When confronted with the basic fact that they are doing more harm than good, the practitioners of such programs will often express zero concern for those they are harming. In fact - if you are astute you will find that they often actually enjoy harming people. This is pretty advanced, and pretty dark. I admit. But, it's real. And, seeing it is an amazing thing to behold. So, what is the answer? People should leave other people alone. That's the answer.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 7 years ago
    Reading the comments makes me question what is "the greater good". What's really good for people is for them to respect one another's rights and deal honestly with one another.

    This makes me thing "greater good", as it's commonly used, is a generic excuse for not respecting people's rights. When even an unsophisticated person says, "wait, no fair, you're messing with my stuff and my life; that's bad," and the perpetrator can't really refute that, he can says "Okay, maybe it's bad, but it's for the greater good." They may mean a supposed utilitarian accounting of good and evil or just some nebulous good in the future.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jdg 7 years ago
    0%. "The greater good" is a form of argument used only to rationalize (or to pretend to explain) decisions after they've been made for other real reasons, or no reason.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ CBJ 7 years ago
    Zero percent or close to it.

    My estimate is that about 50% of evil is done by politicians for the purpose of maintaining or increasing their power. Whether or not they claim it's for the "greater good" is irrelevant.

    The other 50% is done by organized and unorganized criminals for their own short-term gain.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 7 years ago
      He's five foot-two, and he's six feet-four,
      He fights with missiles and with spears.
      He's all of thirty-one, and he's only seventeen,
      He's been a soldier for a thousand years.

      He's a Catholic, a Hindu, an Atheist, a Jain,
      A Buddhist and a Baptist and a Jew.
      And he knows he shouldn't kill,
      And he knows he always will,
      Kill you for me my friend and me for you.

      And he's fighting for Canada,
      He's fighting for France,
      He's fighting for the USA,
      And he's fighting for the Russians,
      And he's fighting for Japan,
      And he thinks we'll put an end to war this way.

      And he's fighting for Democracy,
      He's fighting for the Reds,
      He says it's for the peace of all.
      He's the one who must decide,
      Who's to live and who's to die,
      And he never sees the writing on the wall.

      But without him,
      How would Hitler have condemned them at Dachau?
      Without him Caesar would have stood alone,
      He's the one who gives his body
      As a weapon of the war,
      And without him all this killing can't go on.

      He's the Universal Soldier and he really is to blame,
      His orders come from far away no more,
      They come from here and there and you and me,
      And brothers can't you see,
      This is not the way we put an end to war.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by NealS 7 years ago
        Wow, all of a sudden I feel somewhat embarrassed that I actually went to fight in Vietnam (not really, embarrassed that is). And I was not 17, but actually 27 when I came home. Nothing in that poem ever crossed my mind back then. How and where do we get our freedoms from? Who regulates and directs what we must do to maintain them? No replies necessary, I'm okay with what I did, and I'm not contemplating suicide or anything like that. Life is just complicated. I just hope to come back next time as an eagle and only worry about feeding and breeding.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by bassboat 7 years ago
        Old men should fight wars. The young are pawns. I would qualify as being old. If a Hitler or the like were to emerge we old guys would not try to fight them one on one. We would eliminate them with the superior weapons that we have and not think twice about it. There is no humane war.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 7 years ago
      War is just crime written large. That is why "war crimes" is a redundant phrase. Crimes are seldom done with gain in mind. One exception to that is white collar crimes, of which Objectivists such as Walter Donway deny the existence.

      So-called "street crime" which is impulsive, not rational, is minimal compared to state-sponsored and state-sanctioned crimes, which are planfully competent white collar crimes. But every society from the village to the trans-continental empire depends on willing followers. It takes fewer than 5% to show their disapproval and bring the rulers down.
      See here:
      http://necessaryfacts.blogspot.com/20...
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Lucky 7 years ago
        You are marked down already!
        It is Roger Donway.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by khalling 7 years ago
          I concur. Roger Donway, Walter's brother, writes about anti-trust and business issues. I completely disagree that crime is seldom done for gain. that is nonsense. Roger Donway does not deny white collar crime. He is most definitely against fraud, as an example. War is not a crime written large. the founding of our nation, as an example, was a crime committed? against the King? none of this makes much sense.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by CircuitGuy 7 years ago
            If war is a always a crime, it does not mean the entire founding of the US was a crime, just part of it. Revolutionaries willing to spend the equivalent of billions of dollars of effort and tens of thousands of lives might have found a non-violent approach. It would not be easy, and I cannot guarantee such an approach exists. But the United States and the American Revolutionary War are not the same thing.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by chad 7 years ago
    The argument that the end justifies the means misrepresents the fact that the means is the end. You cannot kill people to free them and expect the result to have those murdered pleased about their termination. If the means is evil and immoral, the result is evil and immoral. It is equivalent to stating that I will take your property by force to make you richer. It cannot work.
    To answer the question, what is the percentage of selling the idea that evil will produce "a greater good." Probably almost all of it. It is the only way to sell evil. What would the tyrant say? What we are about to do is really bad and none of you will profit from it!
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Donald-Brian-Lehoux 7 years ago
    When you compare the CONSTITUTION to the actions of the POLICE you have a perfect example. I was an MP and I saw it first hand and that is why I WAS because I couldn't do the evil. BEING a Christian requires YOU to walk the walk. Any takers? Say it, "I believe in Yeshua, the ancient and true name of Jesus Christ, Jesus Christ that died on the cross for all of us."
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 7 years ago
    Well, if you include the stuff we don't know about, the stuff we suspect and the stuff we find out after the fact... I would put that percentage at 99%!

    Of course the "Greater Good" are those that deem themselves as the greater good...that doesn't include the rest of us...

    PS...the remaining 1% was a mistake!
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by LibertyBelle 7 years ago
    A percentage? Of what? Of the population? Or are
    you asking what percentage of evil was done for the "greater good", as opposed to evil done with no
    such pretense, as a standard bank robbery?

    I believe that the evil done in history for the
    "greater good" numbers at least in the millions
    of the victims (and that may be an understate-
    ment). The victims of the religious persecutions
    in Europe, for instance, the Jews and Protest-
    ants murdered; then the people murdered for
    Hitler's Third Reich, (allegedly for the "greater
    good", or the "Motherland", or some such B.S.
    as that), or those who died of famine, etc. in
    Communist countries. Who can tell?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 7 years ago
      I meant the question as people who do evil for the greater good vs people who do evil for reasons other than the greater good. (A bully who just likes to beat up on the weaker kids would come to mind.)
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo